History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedWhy the West will attack Iran

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Alborz View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 02-Nov-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Alborz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Why the West will attack Iran
    Posted: 23-Jan-2006 at 23:34
Why the West will attack Iran
By Spengler

Why did French President Jacques Chirac last week threaten to use non-conventional - that is, nuclear - weapons against terrorist states? And why did Iran announce that it would shift foreign-exchange reserves out of European banks (although it has since retracted this warning)? The answer lies in the nature of Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Iran needs nuclear weapons, I believe, not to attack Israel, but to support imperial expansion by conventional military means.

Iran's oil exports will shrink to zero in 20 years, just at the demographic inflection point when the costs of maintaining an aged population will crush its state finances, as I reported in Demographics and Iran's imperial design (September 13, 2005). Just outside Iran's present frontiers lie the oil resources of Iraq, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, and not far away are the oil penWindow('/atimes/Middle_East/images/middle-oil1.html','lis t','resizable=yes,scrollbars,width=550,height=700');"> concentrations of eastern Saudi Arabia. Its neighbors are quite as alarmed as Washington about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, and privately quite happy for Washington to wipe out this capability.

It is remarkable how quickly an international consensus has emerged for the eventual use of force against Iran. Chirac's indirect reference to the French nuclear capability was a warning to Tehran. Mohamed ElBaradei, whose Nobel Peace Prize last year was awarded to rap the knuckles of the United States, told Newsweek that in the extreme case, force might be required to stop Iran's acquiring a nuclear capability. German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung told the newspaper Bild am Sonntag that the military option could not be abandoned, although diplomatic efforts should be tried first. Bild, Germany's largest-circulation daily, ran Iranian President Mahmud Ahmedinejad's picture next to Adolf Hitler's, with the headline, "Will Iran plunge the world into the abyss?"

The same Europeans who excoriated the United States for invading Iraq with insufficient proof of the presence of weapons of mass destruction already have signed on to a military campaign against Iran, in advance of Iran's gaining WMD. There are a number of reasons for this sudden lack of squeamishness, and all of them lead back to oil.

First, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have the most to lose from a nuclear-equipped Iran. No one can predict when the Saudi kingdom might become unstable, but whenever it does, Iran will stand ready to support its Shi'ite co-religionists, who make up a majority in the kingdom's oil-producing east.

At some point the United States will reduce or eliminate its presence in Iraq, and the result, I believe, will be civil war. Under conditions of chaos Iran will have a pretext to expand its already substantial presence on the ground in Iraq, perhaps even to intervene militarily on behalf of its Shi'ite co-religionists.

What now is Azerbaijan had been for centuries the northern provinces of the Persian Empire, and a nuclear-armed Iran could revive Persian claims on southern Azerbaijan. Iran continues to lay claim to a share of Caspian Sea energy resources under the Iranian-Soviet treaties of 1921 and 1940. [1] For the time being, Azerbaijani-Iranian relations are the most cordial in years, with Iran providing natural gas to pockets of Azerbaijani territory blockaded by Armenia, and Baku defending Iran's nuclear program. As Iran's oil production dwindles over the next two decades, though, its historic claims on the Caspian are likely to re-emerge.

Ahmedinejad's apocalyptic inclinations have inspired considerable comment from Western analysts, who note that he appears to believe in the early return of the Mahdi, the 12th Imam. I do not know whether Ahmedinejad is mad or sane, but even mad people may be sly and calculating. Iran's prospects are grim. Over a generation it faces demographic decay, economic collapse and cultural deracination. When reason fails to provide a solution to an inherently insoluble problem, irrationality well may take hold. Like Hitler, who also was mad but out-bluffed the West for years before overreaching, Ahmedinejad is pursuing a rational if loathsome imperial policy.

Given Israel's possession of a large arsenal of fission weapons as well as thermonuclear capability, it is extremely unlikely that Iran would attack the Jewish state unless pressed to the wall. Faced with encirclement and ruin, the Islamic Republic is fully capable of lashing out in a destructive and suicidal fashion, not only against Israel but against other antagonists. Whatever one may say about Chirac, he is not remotely stupid, and feels it prudent to warn Iran that pursuit of its imperial ambitions may lead to a French nuclear response. French intelligence evidently believes that Iran may express its frustrations through terrorist actions in the West.

By far the biggest loser in an Iranian confrontation with the West will be China, the fastest-growing among the world's large economies, but also the least efficient in energy use. Higher oil prices will harm China's economy more than any other, and Beijing's reluctance to back Western efforts to encircle Iran are understandable in this context. It is unclear how China will proceed if the rest of the international community confronts Iran; in the great scheme of things it really does not matter.

Washington will initiate military action against Iran only with extreme reluctance, but it will do so nonetheless, except in the extremely unlikely event that Ahmedinejad were to stand down. Rather than a legacy of prosperity and democracy in the Middle East, the administration of US President George W Bush will exit with an economy weakened by higher oil prices and chaos on the ground in Iraq and elsewhere. But it really has no other options, except to let a nuclear-armed spoiler loose in the oil corridor. We have begun the third act of the tragedy that started on September 11, 2001, and I see no way to prevent it from proceeding.

Note
1. For a recent summary of the issue, click here

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA24Ak01.html

"Who so shall worship Ahura Mazda, divine blessing will be upon him, both while living and when dead" Darius The Great
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jan-2006 at 09:16

The statistics in the Asia Times article are interesting.

The point is also well taken.  Nazi Germany knew it had to strike quickly because its resources were limited, and because its neighbors and others did not have the will to use their superior resources to counter Germany.  Iran, unfortunately is misreading strategic reality.  It is also misreading history.

The only natural resource in the region of any consequence is oil.  Iran will of necessity have to attempt to control as much of it as possible to delay the inevitable decline.  That will bring it into conflict not only with Europe, the U.S. and its immediate neighbors, but also India and China both of whom need oil in ever increasing quantity.  Russia is not in need of oil or gas, but will not tolerate an Iranian nuclear presence on its southern flank.

Iran has no allies; its Shiite population is surrounded by Sunni Moslems; it has far less in military capability than did Nazi Germany 65 years ago, and faces military power (already in place), and very close by (Russia; India) that is far more capable than it is.

The things Iran has in common with Nazi Germany are fantasy ideology, and a leader with a big mouth.  I disagree that "his" policy is rational.

Hopefully, some settlement may be achieved in the Gulf, but it looks doubtful in the absence of a domestic Iranian counter-revolution.  These people in the regime are so screwed.  And if they wanted to leave to save their sorry asses, where do they think they can go?

    

Back to Top
Cezar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 09-Nov-2005
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 1211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cezar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jan-2006 at 09:30

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

These people in the regime are so screwed.  And if they wanted to leave to save their sorry asses, where do they think they can go?

Heaven?

Back to Top
krios View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 19-Jan-2006
Location: Slovenia
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote krios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jan-2006 at 20:15
I really dont know why we shouldnt let iranians nuclear weapons. I am 100% they will not use it first ! And i can understand them that they want this powerfull weapon, just look all those people saying how we should attack iran. Come on if someone is talking day by day how we should destroy iran, they sure have every right to feel threatened. And again .... at least dozen countrys have this weapon and lets remember again which one only used it !

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6571
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jan-2006 at 21:32
It doesn't really matter. If it is not Iran now it will be X tomorrow. Soon some minor power will develope nuclear capability, like North Korea, and act resolute to use them for this or that reason. Nuclear proliferation is a fact and soon all self-respecting nations will have their own nuclear arsenal making unneffective the use of conventional force except against internal dissidents, ethnic minorities and ridiculously small states.

Even these will benefit (?) from nuclear proliferation as they will have easier to access such tech and create pocket-bombs to be used in threats or actual terrorist attacks.

Times are changing.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4232
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2006 at 06:12

Originally posted by Maju Maju wrote:

It doesn't really matter. If it is not Iran now it will be X tomorrow. Soon some minor power will develope nuclear capability, like North Korea, and act resolute to use them for this or that reason. Nuclear proliferation is a fact and soon all self-respecting nations will have their own nuclear arsenal making unneffective the use of conventional force except against internal dissidents, ethnic minorities and ridiculously small states.

Even these will benefit (?) from nuclear proliferation as they will have easier to access such tech and create pocket-bombs to be used in threats or actual terrorist attacks.

Times are changing.

A very fatalistic view for you, the optimist.  In other threads you had seemed in favor of the NPT, unless I misread something. 

Of course you are also something of an anarchist.

 

Back to Top
Richard XIII View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 654
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Richard XIII Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jan-2006 at 11:44
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:



A very fatalistic view for you, the optimist.  In other threads you had seemed in favor of the NPT, unless I misread something. 

Of course you are also something of an anarchist.

 Times are changing.




Edited by Richard XIII
"I want to know God's thoughts...
...the rest are details."

Albert Einstein
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.